From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Add more supported primitives in libgccjit IR Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2023 11:14:59 +0000 Message-ID: <87fs46vyvg.fsf@localhost> References: <20230809094655.793FC18A4654@snark.thyrsus.com> <87h6ot7cf3.fsf@localhost> <87edjx7c0b.fsf@localhost> <831qfxw2cx.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8d95918.fsf@localhost> <87zg2lav4b.fsf@yahoo.com> <87sf8d57wf.fsf@localhost> <87r0nxatu1.fsf@yahoo.com> <87pm3h56ig.fsf@localhost> <87edjxarhz.fsf@yahoo.com> <87edjw4uw4.fsf@localhost> <77daee02cf1ba0db70c1@heytings.org> <87v8d8fzr9.fsf@localhost> <87jztofwqm.fsf@localhost> <83cyzgvb70.fsf@gnu.org> <87cyze6pb4.fsf@localhost> <87il93bctr.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5365"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , ams@gnu.org, gregory@heytings.org, luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrea Corallo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 26 13:15:33 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qZrGP-0001DJ-8H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 13:15:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZrFW-0003Tq-2A; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 07:14:38 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZrFT-0003Ta-Q6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 07:14:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZrFP-0004B6-Vk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 07:14:35 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C46EE240104 for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 13:14:29 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1693048469; bh=iWTjy06OpshzdQatUiyYMhgMkaFR4cT/HMjWb1QX0Pw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=Pa1IIGFI3vHJ7mJmaTdnG4af+JsZ6ISZQUBBf9ljXGwnwFeRDVljY2ru9zeaUgPPu daT6ZZ/zki1yHen0MRoQ9/K+kYCSgppBolSsQr95/FfzBVz8bS0M5JwHi7C6TZ+tHE +tQ8ftscGDNxHEr1eXl0bksjcMy/Tnm+ylF+WgucJxLKCRd8YqN5gJonzjR+ZY0vgk IHLVtl4uVkFYrC00FUlBK/9q2qct5qaCcre80nNMPehrwYrBrk0wksVv7nFmceItdS dg/BB7mriLZhcDHViDl//2KS2BNfxgGOftN9mLmmh/89t96IsGUba9N6+/CX8UP3qt C3Jslm7e/bsYg== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4RXvNN6Vzyz9rxF; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 13:14:28 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309248 Archived-At: Andrea Corallo writes: >> Are there other known instances of such missing inference? > > This field is largely unexplored, probably when people will start paying > more attention to the inferred return type of lisp functions we will get > more bug reports for missed opportunities. The question is how to discover such missed opportunities. I ran into realization that list -> listp is not optimized by chance only. I am thinking if it could be worth implementing a pretty-printer for the LIMPLE that will present the optimized code in a form more easily understood by Elisp coders. >> However, the internal dump format prevents more detailed understanding. >> For example, there is no easy way for other people to figure out what >> goes wrong during the optimization passes without knowing the dump >> format. Having an example annotated debug output would be helpful to >> make things more clear. > > Well if it helps the most important LIMPLE operators are AFAIR > documented in the paper you refer to. > > I don't think I've now time to write more doc on this, but it should > pretty straight forward to compare the the output of the last LIMPLE > with what we emit as libgccjitIR to understand what's the meaning to > start digging into the subject. Thanks! I will read again, more carefully. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at